Cubase SX vst overload

[Dekkie]

Dear gurus,

Here's the setup:
Athlon XP 2700+
512 MB memory
running Windows XP
Cubase SX version 1.0.5.58
Audigy Platinum
KX drivers

Here's the problem: I am now starting to use more and more softsynths, but my VST performance goes thru the roof. Even when idle it's at 80% with only 3 synths loaded (vanguard, EXS24 and z3ta+)on 3 tracks. Sound is terrible... cracks and ticks mostly, and everything off-beat....
I tried fiddling around with the latency settings but that doesn't help.

Does anybody have any bright ideas?
Would be much appreciated....

Thanks,

Dek

[topaz]

Dear gurus,

Audigy Platinum
KX drivers

Here's the problem:Dek

[Dekkie]

Dear gurus,

Audigy Platinum
KX drivers

Here's the problem:Dek

Well the drivers helped me greatly with my latence probs...
Otherwise, thanks for the constructive help....

Dek

[topaz]

maybe, but low latency on lower end cards = hi CPU.

Dear gurus,

Audigy Platinum
KX drivers

Here's the problem:Dek

Well the drivers helped me greatly with my latence probs...
Otherwise, thanks for the constructive help....

Dek

[Dekkie]

Turned out to be a nearly-broken fan on my cpu. cpu ran hot -> performance went way down. New fan solved all

[Crackbaby]

someone in need of therapy??

"maybe, but low latency on lower end cards = hi CPU." <- LOL, what an ignorant answer.

[NicFit]

someone in need of therapy??

"maybe, but low latency on lower end cards = hi CPU." <- LOL, what an ignorant answer.

This is absolutely fact...lower latency on any soundcard will increase CPU load. And with some higher-end cards (Like RME) this is not as much of a problem.

nF

[Marc JX8P]

someone in need of therapy??

"maybe, but low latency on lower end cards = hi CPU." <- LOL, what an ignorant answer.

This is absolutely fact...lower latency on any soundcard will increase CPU load. And with some higher-end cards (Like RME) this is not as much of a problem.

nF

Doesn't need to be that low most of the time anyway. I find 10-20 ms. perfectly playable when I need to play real time and for playback you could - I guess - even use higher settings. Having said that, you could always render specific tracks to audio and switch of the original instruments; audio tracks are way lighter on CPU than most VSTi's are.

[DevonB]

someone in need of therapy??

"maybe, but low latency on lower end cards = hi CPU." <- LOL, what an ignorant answer.

Dude, your response is the ignorant answer. Lower latency does equal higher cpu, esp on a lower end card that wasn't necessarily designed to do it in the first place (RME Hammerfall vs Crapblaster for example) Asking for data faster puts higher demands on the system, period.

Devon

[DevonB]

Doesn't need to be that low most of the time anyway. I find 10-20 ms.

I start getting irritated above 6ms as I can hear the 'disconnect' of my playing. 12ms for example drives me up a wall for real time playing!

Devon

[Crackbaby]

someone in need of therapy??

"maybe, but low latency on lower end cards = hi CPU." <- LOL, what an ignorant answer.

Dude, your response is the ignorant answer. Lower latency does equal higher cpu, esp on a lower end card that wasn't necessarily designed to do it in the first place (RME Hammerfall vs Crapblaster for example) Asking for data faster puts higher demands on the system, period.

Devon

Ok Devon. I bet you read the first post.
He has tried changing the latency.
He only used three synths.
And if someone wants to blame .."Crapblaster", i find that very ignorant. It was obvius that the soundcard or its drivers was not at fault here.

And please .. anyone working with a DAW knows that "Lower latency does equal higher cpu".

[Crackbaby]

" I start getting irritated above 6ms as I can hear the 'disconnect' of my playing. 12ms for example drives me up a wall for real time playing!

Devon

--
Simple music philosophy - Those who can, make music. Those who can't, make excuses."

Are you saying that if you had a lowend system with a minimum of 12ms, you would start making excuses and therefor you cant make music? Confusing
I dont know the expression "drives me up a wall", but its probably the total opposite of "excuses". And if so, forget this post.

[DevonB]

" I start getting irritated above 6ms as I can hear the 'disconnect' of my playing. 12ms for example drives me up a wall for real time playing!

Devon

--
Simple music philosophy - Those who can, make music. Those who can't, make excuses."

Are you saying that if you had a lowend system with a minimum of 12ms, you would start making excuses and therefor you cant make music? Confusing
I dont know the expression "drives me up a wall", but its probably the total opposite of "excuses". And if so, forget this post.

Wow, someone is cranky today.

Considering I've had a Pulsar II since I started using softsynths about 3 years ago and that it easily does 1.5ms, it's never been an issue. On top of that, I started with trackers on the Amiga in the early 90's that only offered 4 tracks of audio, and wrote a decent amount of music on that. Hell, I even wrote a few things on an 8088 Intel via a PC speaker, and had to program in note values and note lengths that was strictly mono around 1989 or so. So no, excuses have never been a stopping point for me. If that's all I had was some low end system that only did 12ms, I'd still use it, but look to upgrading.

Devon

[Crackbaby]

Wow, someone is cranky today.

and the post above the one you just answered?

[DevonB]

Wow, someone is cranky today.

and the post above the one you just answered?

A direct answer to your statement. I'm not the one who started the whole thing. How about we just drop it, and go to the next thread, 'eh?

Devon